pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
PvXwiki talk:Requests for Build Master Status/Life Guardian/Archive 1
Interesting. --'-Chaos-' 15:57, 9 March 2009 (UTC) :Indeed Andy 16:02, 9 March 2009 (UTC) @Tab. Nice to see you keep up with such things. All but two times I've talked to Life, its been about builds. Andy 16:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC) :Then talk more with him ;o --'-Chaos-' 16:49, 9 March 2009 (UTC) ::Andy and I have been talking a lot lol. We've worked on revising high end builds for a while. Life 16:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC) :::Andy: we've talked twice. Life: we talk a lot. What the hell. Godbox 18:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC) ::::Godliest don't be dumb. All but two times I've talked to Life, it's been about builds. -- 19:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC) who is life guardian?--Goldenstar 20:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC) :-->Life 20:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC) ::Point being, you've done jack shit worth getting yourself noticed, let alone a BM spot. Idrc whether or not we have a pve BM, but it should at least be someone who contributes more than trolling 3-4 pve fanboi's userpages--Goldenstar 01:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC) :::Lrn2troll contributions. Also, apparently i've done enough to be vandalized by you, and trolled by everyone else. The thing is, we really do need at least 1 BM who knows/gives a shit about PvE, because we DO have a PvE section. Life 02:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC) ::::Vote Anonimous. tbh. --- -- ( ) (talk) 11:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC) ::::: . --☭[[user:Guild of Deals|'Guild']]*talk* 11:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC) ::::::I have best build/talk edit ratio here I think. --Anonimous. D: 11:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC) :::::::I still have twice the build contributions :D and not a much lower ratio in addition to contributing much on to-be trashed builds which makes my contribs vanish --'-Chaos-' 15:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC) ::::::::Use show preview...--Relyk 00:51, 11 March 2009 (UTC) :::::::::Ouch. --'-Chaos-' 12:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC) 12-14 Zomg Life 08:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC) :Though technically the voting is only an indicator. Are misinformed votes the issue in the PvE section, or is it poor build quality and old or abandoned builds? While the PvE section does need help, I don't know if being a BM will serve much practical purpose, as most of the issues could be resolved without the title. On the other hand, if the need for vote removals is more than the AN can take care of, then maybe it is time to give the PvE section a dedicated caretaker. 00:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC) ::Tbh, it's both. Yeah, there are a lot of awful builds, but there are also theorycrafts that were powervoted to Great, as well as functional builds that are rates higher or lower than they really should be. Life 00:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::Seeing as the community is so firmly divided over the issue, how far could you get with WELL tags and just updating builds? I guess I just wonder if getting more of the knowledgeable PvE players here to work on the section would be more effective than giving one user more control over the vetting. 00:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC) ::::I've updated many builds, and have WELL'd even more. I haven't taken a look at the WELL category, but i can guarantee many were put there by me. It wouldnt be needed if one of the BMs just was slightly more knowledgeable about PvE. There are builds i've WELL'd that have had the WELL tag removed, and there are builds that ive put on the AN and nothing has happened. For example, Build:N/Mo Lost Soul Protector, which is tagged for heroes, is a full prot on a necro primary. That means 0 heals, 0 DF, and heroes can't prot worth shit. It's been on the AN for almost a week. There's also builds such as Build:Rt/any Mobile Spirits which are just a flawed concept and/or overrated that nothing will ever be done to. Life 01:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::::I guess you're the most qualified person willing to do anything, and if there is a real need for a BM, which you supported above, then there really aren't any credible reasons not to promote you. The only points of contention I can see would be you not staying in the PvE section, but anyone with half a brain should be able to keep out of what they don't know (though if that was the case BMs wouldn't be needed, and I for one am confident in your ability to think), and the fact that it would increase the PvP/PvE split (which is so large I'm not sure it would matter anyway). 01:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC) ::::::Seeing as the current BM's chose to ignore this - either because they're dumb, or don't want Auron shitting in their cereal, I would say all votes saying we don't need a new BM are wrong. Andy 11:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC) You guys really don't understand how RfBMs work at all do you ^_____^ Misery Says Moo 13:00, 20 April 2009 (UTC) - 13:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :^ Truth. Auron is the only one who can promote to a BM, so if he doesn't like you, guess what? You aren't going to be a BM. :Imo, if you really want to be a BM continue working on the PvE section, suggest archiving builds that you think are bad like that N/Mo prot build, don't just WELL tag builds but suggest ways to change them to be viable, etc. Improving the PvE section doesn't mean that you just report everything to the AN. It means you take personal responsibility for the clean-up of the builds. Until you do that, and Auron sees it and appreciates it, you wont be a BM. 16:32, 20 April 2009 ::Saint (or Gringo, I forget which account) got BM and Auron freaking hated him. Misery Says Moo 16:43, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::Oh, yea. Good call. But isn't he some kind of super-pro with HB or something? And I haven't seen that guy doing anything in a while. Does he still use PvX? 16:44, 20 April 2009 ::::He raged. He won an HB monthly, but he's not that good at HB, lol. Misery Says Moo 16:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::::Oh, ok. I remember someone (maybe Angelous) trying to convince me that he was some super badass HB player. Tbh, I don't give a rat's ass about HB (short of XTH predicts), so I didn't know. 16:50, 20 April 2009 :Thats a pretty sexy flow chart Panic. <3----ﮎHædõ๘یíɳ19px 17:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC) ::KJ, some builds are beyond repair. Other builds are just awful, and should never have been vetted. I've improved and updated many builds, and yet there are so many I can't because none of the admins will do anything about the idiotic votes. And yes, very true flowchart. Life 17:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::There are ways to go around the voting. Try suggesting Archiving or WELLing on the talk pages. If nothing happens in a day or so, then Archive or WELL it yourself. If it's that bad, I'm sure no one will have any objections. 17:57, 20 April 2009 ::::So that would take take of some, not all, of the awful builds. Then there are the builds that are functional, but just don't deserve Great, and yet were voted into Great. It goes the other way, because there are some Good builds that might deserve a Great rating, but are held back by idiots. Life 18:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::::care to give some examples of both cases? (ones that are great but shouldn't be and ones that are good but should be great). ~ PheNaxKian Sysop 18:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :::::Saint didn't win the monthly ^_____# FrostytheAdmin 18:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC) ::::::Build:N/Mo BiP Protector, oops things change. Andy 19:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC) lols this is still open? someone should close it as failed then open a new one -Auron 19:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC) :^ agree. 19:08, 20 April 2009